Like many movies, it help the viewer open up their mind and see things in a different way. It has many parallels to our current situation, as one group will do anything, absolutely anything, to stay in power.

As to all the unusual things happening at that moment in history, “Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Three times is enemy action”.

Great old flick, many many points of fact filled in with a fictional story line.


This thread probably won't last though.

At the end, one realizes:
Jack Ruby just happens to own the bar where 5-6 SS agents got drunk the night before.

Ruby just happens to get past a phalanx of police and kills one of the most protected persons in America.

Ruby just happens to be dying of cancer, and is gone is 4 years.

That is three, so past coincidence there. Now the main person who could help an investigation is gone, and so is his killer. How convenient.

c1steve, you're talking about the film, and not real life, right? Because if you think Ruby "got past a phalanx of police and kills one of the most protected persons in America," I can disassemble that argument with the facts in evidence.

Is this thread about a movie (which I've seen) or is this thread about real life events? If it's the former, let's stick to the subject, please. If it's the latter, I'll go to work on your theory.

John Kennedy was killed by one lone nut- Lee Oswald. There was no conspiracy of any kind, at any time leading up to or after the assassination. There's probably twenty different theories about the assassination, all of them wrong.

So are we discussing Kennedy Conspiracy Theory now? In the guise of talking about a movie? Against Para’s explicit wishes?

I do want to point out, your bit about Jack Ruby is horribly incorrect. He was NOT “gone [in] 6 months...” He died in 1967.

Edited to add: I see Para already stepped in while I was typing. If I stepped over any lines, I apologize.

And he didn't "get past a phalanx" to kill "the most protected person in America." That's horse shit.

Just as with Oswald, Ruby acted alone.

What time was Oswald scheduled to be transferred on the day he was murdered? What time did Oswald actually enter the police garage? What time did Jack Ruby enter the police garage? What path did he take to enter? Why was he in the area in the first place? You don't think this was a spontaneous, emotional act on the part of the (verifiably) unstable Ruby? Tell me, then- what did he leave in his car before he walked to the police garage?

I'll disassemble all the nutball conspiracy theories about Ruby, using facts that you can look up yourself.

I do not know the details you speak of, have only viewed the videos clips that have been on TV. However if the police presence was light, I would ask why? Was it sloppiness or was it intentional?

He may have acted alone, but he may have been encouraged by "handlers". I remember his words "I am just a patsy". That appears to me that Oswald realizes his actions may have been used by others for a specific goal.

I traveled through Georgia, in the early 70's and was shocked to the see the racism. We stopped at a grocery store near the highway, and black persons were letting white people get in line in front of them. Probably 2/3 cut in front. This was about 1974, so I can imagine how some persons in the south 10 years earlier may have hated Kennedy enough to help Oswald.

I have personal experience with deadly conspiracies, as I was the intended victim of someone's criminal attentions. I watched one of them die in their first attempt. I know how these people think, and how they often just need a few phony facts to work their twisted lies in order to avoid prosecution.

There was probably a significant number of persons who would have Kennedy killed if they could. In my opinion, the likely hood of Oswald not being encouraged or helped by others is small. He may have pulled the trigger, but that does not mean he was the only one involved.

quote:

Originally posted by c1steve:
I do not know the details you speak of, have only viewed the videos clips that have been on TV.

Then, man, stop speculating and do your research. Don't you think you should examine the facts in evidence?

Start with the questions I posted in this thread, and then take a look at this. Read the entire thread, please.

The truth is so often quite boring. Tell me- why do you think "researchers" keep visiting the wreck of the Titanic? The answer is because people simply cannot satiate their interest in that disaster, even after a century and even after the wreck was located and mapped in minute detail. The JFK assassination is much the same.

I saw it happen on live TV and spent considerable time in my youth reading the condensed version of the Warren Report among other things. Hearing racism as a factor is new to me. Sometimes the truth is boring. The conspiracy I hear most often has to do with the mob.

Okay, I will read all of that.

I would also love to know what were LBJ and congressman Albert Thomas thinking, when the famous "wink" photo was taken. Was LBJ happy to be in the driving seat, or did someone earlier suggest to Johnson that something might happen?
https://www.reddit.com/r/consp..._photos_of_all_time/

You can read Ruby's 15 pages psych eval yourself, dated 5/7/64.

https://archive.org/details/Ja...tricReports/mode/2up

Also, I strongly recommend you find a copy of Posner's Case Closed and read it. Posner provides references for what he states in his book. Let's deal with the facts, because, beieve me- you won't find the truth about the assassination from the sensational conspiracy theory buffs. These nutballs will lead you off in all different directions and will ignore the facts in evidence, except for the instances where they think they can interpret the facts in their own weird way.

Just watched the Zapruder film from your link. Sure looks like JFK was shot from the front, as his head and torso rocket backward. Even a neck shot would not do that.

Oh, Jesus, give me strength. Stop with the speculation. How much do you do about fluid dynamics? Specifically, how may fluid-filled containers behave when struck with a high velocity rifle shot?

Thanks had not read the psych. eval. Pretty clear that we have an acute psychotic reaction with no evidence of malingering. Reccomendation for immmediate hospitalization are clear. Credible source for the evaluation as well.

I am not an expert on fluid dynamics, but I work 40 hours a week on head and neck injuries. Typically whiplash, but other injuries as well.

Followed a link to Officer Tippet, that was most interesting. Will check out the link to Jack Ruby, thanks for posting.

Read Oswald's comments about not being responsible for either murder. Yeah, his remark that he was a patsy could be a preliminary for a defense.

Another conspiracy movie, The Conversation with Gene Hackman, is fictional. But I believe it does show the extent that people will go through to cover up their actions.

You're talking about human nature.

What gets me is that you talk about how things are "convenient" when you're actually looking at them only superficially. I started out in the 1970s believing that there was a conspiracy, based upon things as "back and to the left". Then, I started to do my own research, and you can see where I am now on this subject.

Do your research. If you're serious about it and you actually invest the time in reading and studying the matter, you can start another thread in six months or a year, but this stuff we're doing now is a waste of time and it reminds me why this subject is off-limits here. People who believe JFK was assassinated as part of a conspiracy don't come to this subject armed with facts. Instead, it's all speculation, incorrect or incorrectly-interpreted information, and inuendo.

You believe there was a conspiracy because that's far more interesting than the banal truth. It's certainly not because you've examined the facts, because you yourself admit that you have only a superficial understanding of the events. I, on the other hand, started out in the conspiracy camp, and after a few years of researching this incident, I began moving the other way.

And, please do me a favor and do not start threads which appear to be one thing, yet turn out to be another. This goes double when the subject at hand is one that you know is off-limits in this forum.

When you say things like "OK, I'll read all that, but..." and then you go on to speculate even further, man, that's no way to go in this forum. Do your research, then speak.

Just look at the amount of data available on this subject:

https://www.archives.gov/resea...eport/chapter-5.html

https://www.archives.gov/resea...hapter-3.html#wounds

What Physics Reveals About the JFK Assassination

quote:

When the president was shot, he says, Kennedy’s head exploded, as the film so graphically shows. Nalli’s model shows that the wound wasn’t where the bullet exited, but where it entered. It demonstrates that a temporary cavity formed inside the president’s soft tissue as the momentum and kinetic energy of the bullet smashed into his skull, causing his head to snap forward.

Based on his model, Nalli also thinks that the theory of a second shooter and that of the president being shot by hollow-point or soft-point bullets are also unlikely. Not only were such bullets never recovered, he writes, but the movements of Kennedy’s head are only consistent with a shot from the back.

Nalli’s not the first person to use physics to model the bullet’s trajectory—the head wound and ballistics are covered in-depth in theWarren Report. But, writes Nalli, his model is unique in that it focuses on the forward motion of the president’s head after he was shot.

“The Zapruder film shows President Kennedy being shot from behind and not from the infamous grassy knoll, in corroboration of the official autopsy findings,” says Nalli in a release. “That’s the only ‘smoking gun’ in the film

Gunshot-wound dynamics model for John F. Kennedy assassination

Nearly sixty years after one of the biggest events in American history, and no credible source has ever come forward to claim complicity. Come on. There's nothing there.

How's the reading coming along? Looks like there's a relatively new book out on Oswald, centered around voice stress analysis. Wanna take a guess at the authors conclusions? Yep

MALCONTENT: Lee Harvey Oswald's Confession by Conduct

Also, I recommend Norman Mailer's Oswald's Tale: An American Mystery, which sits on my bookshelf right next to Posner's Case Closed. A lot of formerly unavailable material came out of the former Soviet Union after its collapse and Mailer integrates much of this material into his book. Well worth your time if you're serious about understanding what actually happened. It's no surprise, is it, that the KGB bugged Oswald's apartment? It would be surprising only if they had not done so. You can read the transcripts for yourself in Mailer's book.

I started to watch this movie. I love movies from this era, so it looks like a winner.

I love the part where they are at the shooting range and using walkie-talkies as large as the Washington monument. good stuff.